5 ms·

> You know what software doesn't fill me with dread to update? FOSS. As someone who's been burnt several times with CachyOS (Arch) updates, I don't think this

> You know what software doesn't fill me with dread to update? FOSS. As someone who's been burnt several times with CachyOS (Arch) updates, I don't think this is true.

bhaak 3mo ago
Arch is bleeding edge. Breakage is expected there. It breaks so others can be stable. Thank you for your service.
- Gigachad 3mo ago
  So many Linux user problems are self inflicted. It’s almost a demonstration why proprietary platforms limit your options so much when users choose to shove a stick in their bike spokes and complain it let them do that.
  - behnamoh 3mo ago
    Nope, we're talking about updates to the OS, not users messing around and shoving a stick in their bike spokes.
    - voakbasda 3mo ago
      Choose a niche distro, deal with niche update issues.
      - j16sdiz 3mo ago
        Choose a major distro, deal with poettering non-sense.
- unsungNovelty 3mo ago
  Arch is not "bleeding edge" . It's latest stable version of packages/software.
  - ludston 3mo ago
    The fact that Arch is bleeding edge has been an explicit part of the Arch philosophy for as long as I've been using it (for 20 years now). It breaks a lot less frequently than it used to.
    - unsungNovelty 3mo ago
      I personally think the whole bleeding edge argument is funny. Imagine me telling macOS27 is bleeding edge. Or any stable version of software u use is bleeding edge and that we should wait 6 months before using it. Arch reflects the state of linux. I will never say it's perfect. But rolling releases give u the latest stable version of software. Like I said, I've found arch to be easier to fix. I've been burned too many times cos of Ubuntu and the lots.
  - ragall 3mo ago
    Upstream developers declaring a release as "stable" isn't sufficient to make it so. Distros and users are the ones who decide what is stable and what isn't.
    - MrDrMcCoy 3mo ago
      Trouble is, there's an enormous gap between when maintainers accept that a package as stable and when it actually makes it into the next release. I'd be plenty happy waiting an extra month or two for a stable release, but am not thrilled with waiting a year or more for one.
      - ragall 3mo ago
        I used to think that way when I was young and with plenty of free time. Nowadays I want stability more than anything else and I'm fine with software that's 1 year old. The only problem still present is how to buy a new laptop and have everything work from the beginning.
        unsungNovelty 3mo ago
- LargoLasskhyfv 3mo ago
  Using Cachy since about two years now. Never had any stress with it. Maybe it's about the random combination of components, hardware, driver/firmware quality? If you've got a bad combo, it will always crap out at some point in time. But so do others, too. Just on different combinations.
QwenGlazer9000 3mo ago
Arch users are basically beta testers. Near same day updates with upstream.

> You know what software doesn't fill me with dread to update? FOSS. As someone who's been burnt several times with CachyOS (Arch) updates, I don't think this is true.

bhaak 3mo ago

Arch is bleeding edge. Breakage is expected there. It breaks so others can be stable. Thank you for your service.

Gigachad 3mo ago
So many Linux user problems are self inflicted. It’s almost a demonstration why proprietary platforms limit your options so much when users choose to shove a stick in their bike spokes and complain it let them do that.
- behnamoh 3mo ago
  Nope, we're talking about updates to the OS, not users messing around and shoving a stick in their bike spokes.
  - voakbasda 3mo ago
    Choose a niche distro, deal with niche update issues.
    - j16sdiz 3mo ago
      Choose a major distro, deal with poettering non-sense.
unsungNovelty 3mo ago
Arch is not "bleeding edge" . It's latest stable version of packages/software.
- ludston 3mo ago
  The fact that Arch is bleeding edge has been an explicit part of the Arch philosophy for as long as I've been using it (for 20 years now). It breaks a lot less frequently than it used to.
  - unsungNovelty 3mo ago
    I personally think the whole bleeding edge argument is funny. Imagine me telling macOS27 is bleeding edge. Or any stable version of software u use is bleeding edge and that we should wait 6 months before using it. Arch reflects the state of linux. I will never say it's perfect. But rolling releases give u the latest stable version of software. Like I said, I've found arch to be easier to fix. I've been burned too many times cos of Ubuntu and the lots.
- ragall 3mo ago
  Upstream developers declaring a release as "stable" isn't sufficient to make it so. Distros and users are the ones who decide what is stable and what isn't.
  - MrDrMcCoy 3mo ago
    Trouble is, there's an enormous gap between when maintainers accept that a package as stable and when it actually makes it into the next release. I'd be plenty happy waiting an extra month or two for a stable release, but am not thrilled with waiting a year or more for one.
    - ragall 3mo ago
      I used to think that way when I was young and with plenty of free time. Nowadays I want stability more than anything else and I'm fine with software that's 1 year old. The only problem still present is how to buy a new laptop and have everything work from the beginning.
      - unsungNovelty 3mo ago
LargoLasskhyfv 3mo ago
Using Cachy since about two years now. Never had any stress with it. Maybe it's about the random combination of components, hardware, driver/firmware quality? If you've got a bad combo, it will always crap out at some point in time. But so do others, too. Just on different combinations.

QwenGlazer9000 3mo ago

Arch users are basically beta testers. Near same day updates with upstream.